About your Search

20130117
20130125
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
't think, i'm not sure. >> senator mccain was asking about the president's role. >> senator mccain made a huge issue out of what i made clear our view is a nonissue. >> over the confusion of the talking points saying the american people deserve the truth. >> you ought to have your facts straight. >> one week after the attacks, carney said the initial information suggested there was concrete evidence it was sparked by protests over video. >> that what we know thus far. based on the evidence, concrete evidence, not the supposition, the concrete evidence we have thus far. >> carney was asked to name the concrete evidence. >> assessment made by the intelligence community based on the information they had. >> now another looming question is how the president can still claim that al-qaeda has been decimateed when there is still clearly a threat in northern africa and elsewhere. today, secretary clinton testified the u.s. clearly wiped out their core, such as usama bin laden but added we can "kill the leaders" and yet their affiliates keep growing. bret? >> bret: ed henry live on the north law
. >>brian: tell me what you think of this from senator mccain and senator rand paul. >> i categorically reject your answer to senator johnson about, well, we didn't ask these survivors who were flown to ramstein the next day, that this was not a spontaneous demonstration. to say it was because an investigation was going on -- >> had i been president at the time and i found you did not read the cables from benghazi, did not read the cables from ambassador stevens, i would have relieved you of your post. i think it's inexcusable. >> those were two of the best statements made along with senator johnson's question. what did she do with the statement from senator mccain and the statement from senator paul? she didn't reply at all. then they went on to the next question. >>brian: her answer was interesting and it was very easy, for four months she had the answer. her answer was everything is addressed to me that comes into the state department. but i don't see every cable. it is not possible. >> it's too much for me to read. you know what? it's her job to know things. it's her job to execute
things that we see greater cooperation on. >> senator mccain. >> thank you. again, thank you for allowing me the honor of introducing you to the committee and i look forward to many of our spirited conversations that we have had for many years. i didn't want to bring it up but since it was brought up, i have to respond again. americans do care. they do care. they do care why four americans were murdered and they do care why the american people were misled. they were misled by the talking points that the sec -- that secretary rice told the american people which were false. they were misled when the information that we needed to know about how those talking points were put together, which we still don't know the answers to, many months later. we were misled when it was -- when we were not allowed to -- when we don't -- still haven't gotten answers why there was not better security at the consulate when there was clear indications of the threat. we were misled when we were not told that there was a request for the 16-member security force to remain at the consulate and were removed. the list
information. >> ifill: republican john mccain pressed clinton on why u.s. consular staff evacuated from libya to germany weren't questioned sooner. >> i categorically reject your answer to senator johnson about, well, we didn't ask these survivors, who were flown to ramstein the next day, that they-- that this was not a spontaneous demonstration. to say that it's because an investigation was going on-- the american people deserve to know answers, and they certainly don't deserve false answers. so here we are, four months later, and we still don't have the basic information. now, if you want to go out and tell the american people what happened, you should at least have interviewed the people who were there instead of saying, no, we couldn't talk to them because an f.b.i. investigation was going on. >> well, senator, i understand your very strong feelings. you knew chris. you were a friend of chris. you were one of the staunchest supporters of the efforts to dislodge qaddafi and try to give the libyan people a chance. and we just have a disagreement. we have a disagreement about what did happen
, what are we going to do? the tone was pretty much set by arizona senator john mccain. >> should he be confirmed, and i'm confident he will be, i'm sure we will have our disagreements which i know neither of us will hesitate to bring to the other's attention. but i know he will acquit himself in that office with distinction and use his many talents and his indefatigable persistence to advance our country's interests. and i commend his nominationing to you -- his nomination to you without reservation. >> reporter: at this point senators seem to think that john kerry will be our next secretary of state. he is not believed to be one of the more controversial nominations, and so perhaps they will save their fight for a more controversial pick. uma? uma: looks like smooth sailing for the senator. thank you very much. >> reporter: thank you. jon: well, our military faces a major transformation. the pentagonner shoe -- issuing a statement officially lifting a ban against women fighting on the front lines. right now we are waiting to hear from defense secretary panetta and the chairman of t
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)